Search Results

Search found 6198 results on 248 pages for 'traffic filtering'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/248 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • capture nimbuzz traffic

    - by lurscher
    I need to capture all the traffic, specially during login, between nimbuzz pc client and nimbuzz server. The reason is that i need to debug outgoing packets at login that mark the user visibility status in order to reproduce them in a in-house XMPP client application I've tried doing this with wireshark, but i seem to be pretty helpless with this tool. Also, the packets i've been able to see are all before the SASL negotiation happens, after that, i cannot see the xml packets being exchanged any help for how to achieve this task is greatly appreciated (preferably on Windows, since there is no nimbuzz client for linux, in any case i can install one in a VM and monitor the traffic between the VM instance in the linux host)

    Read the article

  • Traffic shaping L2TP/IPsec VPN (via accounts not connection)

    - by Cromulent
    I need to be able to control the amount of bandwidth a specific user account can use on a VPN connection. One account I want to be able to use the VPN with no restrictions and another account I want to limit to a reasonable amount of bandwidth (say 10GB or so a month). I'm aware that you can traffic shape individual connections but that does not quite solve the problem as the limited account can just disconnect and reconnect to get a new connection. I need to be able to limit bandwidth on a login basis for a given period of time (monthly limit). I'm really not that familiar with traffic shaping in general so any advice would be appreciated. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Where does traffic shaping typically take place?

    - by eekmeter
    As part of upgrading our network infrastructure we are looking to traffic shape our bandwidth since we only have about 3Mb down / 1 Mb up. We're looking to prioritize it so that web browsing gets priority and in the future some VOIP might be added in as well. Internal LAN traffic doesn't need to be controlled just our outbound connection. I've been looking at Cisco hardware and it seems that several of their products do shaping at the core switch, firewall, and router level. I'm wondering where does shaping normally take place? Is it normally done at the router, core switch, or firewall?

    Read the article

  • Debian Squeeze - Monitor outgoing traffic

    - by Sam W.
    I have a small webserver that running on Lighttpd 1.4 which steadily uses 250GB or less bandwidth for the past couple of months. But since May the traffic spikeed to more than triple of what it was. Nothing special was on my site to make its spike like that. When I checked with vnstat I found that 70% of the bandwidth is tx. I suspect I've been hacked and my webserver is becoming some sort of bot. ClamAV comes out with nothing and I already replaced the Joomla installation with a fresh one, early in June. But right now the traffic stayed the same. My question, how can I monitor my server and look what is transmitting all that data out? My need to be done to pinpoint what is the culprit. Can someone please point to the right way to solve this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Need solutions in sharing a 3Mb/768Kbps DSL line to 60+ users and faster bandwidth

    - by elistp
    Two parts. Part 1: We currently have 2 DSL Lines with 3Mb/768Kbps speeds load balanced for 60+ users. Accessing the Internet is borderline unusable. The simple solution would be to get a faster DSL Line but the highest DSL package is 6Mb/768Kbps, has quite the price jump, and doesn't do anything to help with upload speeds. I'm looking for free or extremely low cost solutions (web cache, traffic shaping, bandwidth controls, etc) to help with making Internet access more bearable until the next funding year. Can anyone give any advice? Part 2: We're looking into a 4.5Mb bonded T1 in the next funding year which is of course significantly more expensive than 2 DSL lines. Are bonded T1s our only hope for faster speeds? Are there any better alternatives?

    Read the article

  • Does anyone really understand how HFSC scheduling in Linux/BSD works?

    - by Mecki
    I read the original SIGCOMM '97 PostScript paper about HFSC, it is very technically, but I understand the basic concept. Instead of giving a linear service curve (as with pretty much every other scheduling algorithm), you can specify a convex or concave service curve and thus it is possible to decouple bandwidth and delay. However, even though this paper mentions to kind of scheduling algorithms being used (real-time and link-share), it always only mentions ONE curve per scheduling class (the decoupling is done by specifying this curve, only one curve is needed for that). Now HFSC has been implemented for BSD (OpenBSD, FreeBSD, etc.) using the ALTQ scheduling framework and it has been implemented Linux using the TC scheduling framework (part of iproute2). Both implementations added two additional service curves, that were NOT in the original paper! A real-time service curve and an upper-limit service curve. Again, please note that the original paper mentions two scheduling algorithms (real-time and link-share), but in that paper both work with one single service curve. There never have been two independent service curves for either one as you currently find in BSD and Linux. Even worse, some version of ALTQ seems to add an additional queue priority to HSFC (there is no such thing as priority in the original paper either). I found several BSD HowTo's mentioning this priority setting (even though the man page of the latest ALTQ release knows no such parameter for HSFC, so officially it does not even exist). This all makes the HFSC scheduling even more complex than the algorithm described in the original paper and there are tons of tutorials on the Internet that often contradict each other, one claiming the opposite of the other one. This is probably the main reason why nobody really seems to understand how HFSC scheduling really works. Before I can ask my questions, we need a sample setup of some kind. I'll use a very simple one as seen in the image below: Here are some questions I cannot answer because the tutorials contradict each other: What for do I need a real-time curve at all? Assuming A1, A2, B1, B2 are all 128 kbit/s link-share (no real-time curve for either one), then each of those will get 128 kbit/s if the root has 512 kbit/s to distribute (and A and B are both 256 kbit/s of course), right? Why would I additionally give A1 and B1 a real-time curve with 128 kbit/s? What would this be good for? To give those two a higher priority? According to original paper I can give them a higher priority by using a curve, that's what HFSC is all about after all. By giving both classes a curve of [256kbit/s 20ms 128kbit/s] both have twice the priority than A2 and B2 automatically (still only getting 128 kbit/s on average) Does the real-time bandwidth count towards the link-share bandwidth? E.g. if A1 and B1 both only have 64kbit/s real-time and 64kbit/s link-share bandwidth, does that mean once they are served 64kbit/s via real-time, their link-share requirement is satisfied as well (they might get excess bandwidth, but lets ignore that for a second) or does that mean they get another 64 kbit/s via link-share? So does each class has a bandwidth "requirement" of real-time plus link-share? Or does a class only have a higher requirement than the real-time curve if the link-share curve is higher than the real-time curve (current link-share requirement equals specified link-share requirement minus real-time bandwidth already provided to this class)? Is upper limit curve applied to real-time as well, only to link-share, or maybe to both? Some tutorials say one way, some say the other way. Some even claim upper-limit is the maximum for real-time bandwidth + link-share bandwidth? What is the truth? Assuming A2 and B2 are both 128 kbit/s, does it make any difference if A1 and B1 are 128 kbit/s link-share only, or 64 kbit/s real-time and 128 kbit/s link-share, and if so, what difference? If I use the seperate real-time curve to increase priorities of classes, why would I need "curves" at all? Why is not real-time a flat value and link-share also a flat value? Why are both curves? The need for curves is clear in the original paper, because there is only one attribute of that kind per class. But now, having three attributes (real-time, link-share, and upper-limit) what for do I still need curves on each one? Why would I want the curves shape (not average bandwidth, but their slopes) to be different for real-time and link-share traffic? According to the little documentation available, real-time curve values are totally ignored for inner classes (class A and B), they are only applied to leaf classes (A1, A2, B1, B2). If that is true, why does the ALTQ HFSC sample configuration (search for 3.3 Sample configuration) set real-time curves on inner classes and claims that those set the guaranteed rate of those inner classes? Isn't that completely pointless? (note: pshare sets the link-share curve in ALTQ and grate the real-time curve; you can see this in the paragraph above the sample configuration). Some tutorials say the sum of all real-time curves may not be higher than 80% of the line speed, others say it must not be higher than 70% of the line speed. Which one is right or are they maybe both wrong? One tutorial said you shall forget all the theory. No matter how things really work (schedulers and bandwidth distribution), imagine the three curves according to the following "simplified mind model": real-time is the guaranteed bandwidth that this class will always get. link-share is the bandwidth that this class wants to become fully satisfied, but satisfaction cannot be guaranteed. In case there is excess bandwidth, the class might even get offered more bandwidth than necessary to become satisfied, but it may never use more than upper-limit says. For all this to work, the sum of all real-time bandwidths may not be above xx% of the line speed (see question above, the percentage varies). Question: Is this more or less accurate or a total misunderstanding of HSFC? And if assumption above is really accurate, where is prioritization in that model? E.g. every class might have a real-time bandwidth (guaranteed), a link-share bandwidth (not guaranteed) and an maybe an upper-limit, but still some classes have higher priority needs than other classes. In that case I must still prioritize somehow, even among real-time traffic of those classes. Would I prioritize by the slope of the curves? And if so, which curve? The real-time curve? The link-share curve? The upper-limit curve? All of them? Would I give all of them the same slope or each a different one and how to find out the right slope? I still haven't lost hope that there exists at least a hand full of people in this world that really understood HFSC and are able to answer all these questions accurately. And doing so without contradicting each other in the answers would be really nice ;-)

    Read the article

  • Cisco ASA not forwarding traffic from one interface to another

    - by Antoine Benkemoun
    Hello ServerFault, I am needing help in the configuration process of my Cisco ASA 5510. I have set up 4 Cisco ASA interconnected together via a big LAN. Each Cisco ASA has 3 or 4 LANs attached to them. The IP routing part is taken care of by OSPF. My problem is on another level. A computer connected to one of the LANs attached to an ASA has no problem communicating with the outside world. The outside world being anything "after" the ASA. My problem is that I am completely unable to have them communicate with another LAN connected to the same ASA. To rephrase this, I am unable to send traffic from one interface of a given ASA to another interface of the same ASA. My configuration is the following : ! hostname Fuji ! interface Ethernet0/0 speed 100 duplex full nameif outside security-level 0 ip address 10.0.0.2 255.255.255.0 no shutdown ! interface Ethernet0/1 speed 100 duplex full nameif cs4 no shutdown security-level 100 ip address 10.1.4.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Ethernet0/2 speed 100 duplex full no shutdown ! interface Ethernet0/2.15 vlan 15 nameif cs5 security-level 100 ip address 10.1.5.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Ethernet0/2.16 vlan 16 nameif cs6 security-level 100 ip address 10.1.6.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Management0/0 speed 100 duplex full nameif management security-level 100 ip address 10.6.0.252 255.255.255.0 ! access-list nat_cs4 extended permit ip 10.1.4.0 255.255.255.0 any access-list acl_cs4 extended permit ip 10.1.4.0 255.255.255.0 any access-list nat_cs5 extended permit ip 10.1.5.0 255.255.255.0 any access-list acl_cs5 extended permit ip 10.1.5.0 255.255.255.0 any access-list nat_cs6 extended permit ip 10.1.6.0 255.255.255.0 any access-list acl_cs6 extended permit ip 10.1.6.0 255.255.255.0 any ! access-list nat_outside extended permit ip any any access-list acl_outside extended permit ip any 10.1.4.0 255.255.255.0 access-list acl_outside extended permit ip any 10.1.5.0 255.255.255.0 access-list acl_outside extended permit ip any 10.1.6.0 255.255.255.0 ! nat (outside) 0 access-list nat_outside nat (cs4) 0 access-list nat_cs4 nat (cs5) 0 access-list nat_cs5 nat (cs6) 0 access-list nat_cs6 ! static (outside,cs4) 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 netmask 0.0.0.0 static (outside,cs5) 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 netmask 0.0.0.0 static (outside,cs6) 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 netmask 0.0.0.0 ! static (cs4,outside) 10.1.4.0 10.1.4.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 static (cs4,cs5) 10.1.4.0 10.1.4.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 static (cs4,cs6) 10.1.4.0 10.1.4.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 ! static (cs5,outside) 10.1.5.0 10.1.5.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 static (cs5,cs4) 10.1.5.0 10.1.5.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 static (cs5,cs6) 10.1.5.0 10.1.5.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 ! static (cs6,outside) 10.1.6.0 10.1.6.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 static (cs6,cs4) 10.1.6.0 10.1.6.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 static (cs6,cs5) 10.1.6.0 10.1.6.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 ! access-group acl_outside in interface outside access-group acl_cs4 in interface cs4 access-group acl_cs5 in interface cs5 access-group acl_cs6 in interface cs6 ! router ospf 1 network 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 area 1 network 10.1.4.0 255.255.255.0 area 1 network 10.1.5.0 255.255.255.0 area 1 network 10.1.6.0 255.255.255.0 area 1 log-adj-changes ! There is nothing really complicated in this configuration. It just NATs from one interface to another and that's it. I have tried enabling same-security-traffic permit inter-interface but that doesn't help. I therefore must be missing something a little bit more complicated. Does anyone know why I cannot foward traffic from one interface to another ? Thank you in advance for your help, Antoine

    Read the article

  • Does anyone really understand how HFSC scheduling in Linux/BSD works?

    - by Mecki
    I read the original SIGCOMM '97 PostScript paper about HFSC, it is very technically, but I understand the basic concept. Instead of giving a linear service curve (as with pretty much every other scheduling algorithm), you can specify a convex or concave service curve and thus it is possible to decouple bandwidth and delay. However, even though this paper mentions to kind of scheduling algorithms being used (real-time and link-share), it always only mentions ONE curve per scheduling class (the decoupling is done by specifying this curve, only one curve is needed for that). Now HFSC has been implemented for BSD (OpenBSD, FreeBSD, etc.) using the ALTQ scheduling framework and it has been implemented Linux using the TC scheduling framework (part of iproute2). Both implementations added two additional service curves, that were NOT in the original paper! A real-time service curve and an upper-limit service curve. Again, please note that the original paper mentions two scheduling algorithms (real-time and link-share), but in that paper both work with one single service curve. There never have been two independent service curves for either one as you currently find in BSD and Linux. Even worse, some version of ALTQ seems to add an additional queue priority to HSFC (there is no such thing as priority in the original paper either). I found several BSD HowTo's mentioning this priority setting (even though the man page of the latest ALTQ release knows no such parameter for HSFC, so officially it does not even exist). This all makes the HFSC scheduling even more complex than the algorithm described in the original paper and there are tons of tutorials on the Internet that often contradict each other, one claiming the opposite of the other one. This is probably the main reason why nobody really seems to understand how HFSC scheduling really works. Before I can ask my questions, we need a sample setup of some kind. I'll use a very simple one as seen in the image below: Here are some questions I cannot answer because the tutorials contradict each other: What for do I need a real-time curve at all? Assuming A1, A2, B1, B2 are all 128 kbit/s link-share (no real-time curve for either one), then each of those will get 128 kbit/s if the root has 512 kbit/s to distribute (and A and B are both 256 kbit/s of course), right? Why would I additionally give A1 and B1 a real-time curve with 128 kbit/s? What would this be good for? To give those two a higher priority? According to original paper I can give them a higher priority by using a curve, that's what HFSC is all about after all. By giving both classes a curve of [256kbit/s 20ms 128kbit/s] both have twice the priority than A2 and B2 automatically (still only getting 128 kbit/s on average) Does the real-time bandwidth count towards the link-share bandwidth? E.g. if A1 and B1 both only have 64kbit/s real-time and 64kbit/s link-share bandwidth, does that mean once they are served 64kbit/s via real-time, their link-share requirement is satisfied as well (they might get excess bandwidth, but lets ignore that for a second) or does that mean they get another 64 kbit/s via link-share? So does each class has a bandwidth "requirement" of real-time plus link-share? Or does a class only have a higher requirement than the real-time curve if the link-share curve is higher than the real-time curve (current link-share requirement equals specified link-share requirement minus real-time bandwidth already provided to this class)? Is upper limit curve applied to real-time as well, only to link-share, or maybe to both? Some tutorials say one way, some say the other way. Some even claim upper-limit is the maximum for real-time bandwidth + link-share bandwidth? What is the truth? Assuming A2 and B2 are both 128 kbit/s, does it make any difference if A1 and B1 are 128 kbit/s link-share only, or 64 kbit/s real-time and 128 kbit/s link-share, and if so, what difference? If I use the seperate real-time curve to increase priorities of classes, why would I need "curves" at all? Why is not real-time a flat value and link-share also a flat value? Why are both curves? The need for curves is clear in the original paper, because there is only one attribute of that kind per class. But now, having three attributes (real-time, link-share, and upper-limit) what for do I still need curves on each one? Why would I want the curves shape (not average bandwidth, but their slopes) to be different for real-time and link-share traffic? According to the little documentation available, real-time curve values are totally ignored for inner classes (class A and B), they are only applied to leaf classes (A1, A2, B1, B2). If that is true, why does the ALTQ HFSC sample configuration (search for 3.3 Sample configuration) set real-time curves on inner classes and claims that those set the guaranteed rate of those inner classes? Isn't that completely pointless? (note: pshare sets the link-share curve in ALTQ and grate the real-time curve; you can see this in the paragraph above the sample configuration). Some tutorials say the sum of all real-time curves may not be higher than 80% of the line speed, others say it must not be higher than 70% of the line speed. Which one is right or are they maybe both wrong? One tutorial said you shall forget all the theory. No matter how things really work (schedulers and bandwidth distribution), imagine the three curves according to the following "simplified mind model": real-time is the guaranteed bandwidth that this class will always get. link-share is the bandwidth that this class wants to become fully satisfied, but satisfaction cannot be guaranteed. In case there is excess bandwidth, the class might even get offered more bandwidth than necessary to become satisfied, but it may never use more than upper-limit says. For all this to work, the sum of all real-time bandwidths may not be above xx% of the line speed (see question above, the percentage varies). Question: Is this more or less accurate or a total misunderstanding of HSFC? And if assumption above is really accurate, where is prioritization in that model? E.g. every class might have a real-time bandwidth (guaranteed), a link-share bandwidth (not guaranteed) and an maybe an upper-limit, but still some classes have higher priority needs than other classes. In that case I must still prioritize somehow, even among real-time traffic of those classes. Would I prioritize by the slope of the curves? And if so, which curve? The real-time curve? The link-share curve? The upper-limit curve? All of them? Would I give all of them the same slope or each a different one and how to find out the right slope? I still haven't lost hope that there exists at least a hand full of people in this world that really understood HFSC and are able to answer all these questions accurately. And doing so without contradicting each other in the answers would be really nice ;-)

    Read the article

  • How to prioritize openvpn traffic?

    - by aditsu
    I have an openvpn server, with one network interface. VPN traffic is extremely slow. I tried to do traffic control with this configuration (currently): qdisc del dev eth0 root qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 12 class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 900mbit #vpn class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:10 htb rate 1500kbit ceil 3000kbit prio 1 #local net class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:11 htb rate 10mbit ceil 900mbit prio 2 #other class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:12 htb rate 500kbit ceil 1000kbit prio 2 filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip sport 1194 0xffff flowid 1:10 filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 2 u32 match ip dst 192.168.10.0/24 flowid 1:11 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 10: sfq perturb 10 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:11 handle 11: sfq perturb 10 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:12 handle 12: sfq perturb 10 But it's still extremely slow. I have an imaps connection that keeps transferring data continuously (I successfully limited the rate) but with openvpn I can't seem to get more than about 100kbit/s The internet connection speed is about 3mbit/s (symmetric) What could be the problem? Does the sport filter work for udp?

    Read the article

  • How to prioritize openvpn traffic?

    - by aditsu
    I have an openvpn server, with one network interface. VPN traffic is extremely slow. I tried to do traffic control with this configuration (currently): qdisc del dev eth0 root qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 12 class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 900mbit #vpn class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:10 htb rate 1500kbit ceil 3000kbit prio 1 #local net class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:11 htb rate 10mbit ceil 900mbit prio 2 #other class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:12 htb rate 500kbit ceil 1000kbit prio 2 filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip sport 1194 0xffff flowid 1:10 filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 2 u32 match ip dst 192.168.10.0/24 flowid 1:11 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 10: sfq perturb 10 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:11 handle 11: sfq perturb 10 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:12 handle 12: sfq perturb 10 But it's still extremely slow. I have an imaps connection that keeps transferring data continuously (I successfully limited the rate) but with openvpn I can't seem to get more than about 100kbit/s The internet connection speed is about 3mbit/s (symmetric) What could be the problem? Does the sport filter work for udp?

    Read the article

  • Local traffic through VPN, global traffic through WAN

    - by ikonoma
    I have an issue with my internet connection. I am using VPN (Aventail Client) to access the local resources. When connected to VPN the Internet traffic passes through it, not through my LAN or Wi-Fi network. I would like to change the routing table to use the Wi-Fi adapter of the PC for WAN traffic. I have routing file, which works very well and routes the traffic in this way, but only when I am physically connected to the local network through LAN. But I can't set it to work with the VPN connection, because I have no gateway when I am connected to it. Etc this in bold is missing. What to do? route change 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 172.16.76.1 metric 200 if 12 route change 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 10.44.2.1 metric 400 if 11 route add 150.251.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0 10.44.2.1 metric 100 if 11 route add 10.0.0.0 mask 255.0.0.0 10.44.2.1 metric 100 if 11 pause

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net MVC2 (RTM) breaks response filtering - "Filtering is not allowed"

    - by womp
    I've just done a test run of upgrading a project to ASP.Net MVC 2 (RTM) in anticipation of the full official .Net 4.0 release coming later this month. Our application is using a minimizer for our CSS and javascript. To do so, it is making use of the HttpResponse.Filter property to set a custom filter. With the upgrade, the setter for this property is throwing an HttpException saying "Filtering is not allowed." Looking that the HttpResponse.Filter property in reflector shows this: set { if (!this.UsingHttpWriter) { throw new HttpException(SR.GetString("Filtering_not_allowed")); } ... private bool UsingHttpWriter { get { return ((this._httpWriter != null) && (this._writer == this._httpWriter)); } } Clearly something has changed in the way the HttpResponse is writing to the output stream in MVC2. Does anyone know what the change is, or at least a workaround for this? EDIT: This seems pretty radical. Some further investigation shows that ASP.Net MVC 2 RTM is using a System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage.SwitchWriter as the Output property of an HttpResponse, whereas MVC 1 was using a plain old HttpWriter. That explains why the exception is being thrown. But that doesn't explain why they've chosen to completely break this functionality. This thread seems to indicate that this is just temporary... but this makes me pretty nervous... this is the RTM after all. Any further comments appreciated on this.

    Read the article

  • How can I find the approximate daily traffic of a site which I don't own?

    - by John Thomas
    I want to find the approximate daily traffic of a site which isn't ours, and the site is located in other country than US (in Greece - hence no Quantcast or Compete.com afaik) and it doesn't use Google Ads (hence no Google Ad Planner). I know about Alexa but the site(s) has/have relatively low traffic and the Alexa's rank isn't very useful (same stands to Google Trends). Or perhaps I should look more at Alexa's data? Any other ideas? PS: I looked before posting here and here. No luck.

    Read the article

  • sendmail rules for filtering spam

    - by user71061
    Hi! Can anyone help me with constructing sendmail rules for limiting spam? Assuming that name of my domain is my.domain.com, I want to use following rules: If BOTH sender and recipient address is from my.domain.com, message should be rejected (sendmail server only relays messages between my internal exchange server and outside word, so sending messages between users from my.domain.com always occour on exchange server and never on sendmail server) If recipient list contains AT LAST ONE invalid address, whole message should be rejected (even for valid recipients addresses) If sending server uses HELO message with bogus domain name (other than domain of this server), message should be rejected Any server attempting to send mail to dedicated address (f.e. [email protected]), should be automatically blacklisted Any other suggested rules ...

    Read the article

  • Filtering your offices IPs from Google Analytics when each has a dynamic IP?

    - by leeand00
    I found the documentation for filtering IPs from Google Analytics, but the address of the several locations of our company all have dynamic IP addresses that change every 30 days from what I'm told. I know from working with Dynamic DNS that the provider usually gives you a script that you configure your router to run when it's IP address changes or when it is restarted, which passes the new IP address to the DDNS server. I'm wondering if there might be a way to write or use a preexisting script to do the same thing with the Google Analytics API.

    Read the article

  • Layer-7 filtering

    - by oidfrosty
    someone has ever used / is using layer7-filter application? this is the site http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/ and the wiki's article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L7-filter

    Read the article

  • Will my traffic come back after my site redesign?

    - by Steve
    I screwed up. I launched my site after rebuilding it without setting up the proper 301's and traffic immediately dropped about 60%(it's not really something I thought about). After about a week and a half, I set the 301's back up yesterday and resubmitted my sitemap to google. Google has yet to index the whole thing, but traffic isn't getting any better. Is it likely to come back? If so, I. How long? Has this happened to you? Any info is appreciated. I am really anxious!

    Read the article

  • Problem Disabling Roaming Profiles on Grouped Users

    - by user43207
    I'm having some serious issues getting a group of users to stop using roaming profiles. As expected, I have roaming profiles enabled accross the domain. - But am doing GPO filtering, limiting the scope. I originally had it set to authenticated users for Roaming, but as the domain has branched out to multiple locations, I've limited the scope to only people that are near the central office. The GPO that I have linked filtered to a group I have created that include users that I don't want to have roaming profiles. This GPO is sitting at the root of the domain, with the "Forced" setting enabled, so it should override any setting below it. *On a side note, it is the ONLY GPO that I have set to "Forced" right now. I know the GPO is working, since I can see the original registy settings on a user that logged in under roaming profiles - and then that same user logging in after I made the Group Policy changes, the registry reflects a local profile. But unfortunately, even after making those settings - the user is given a roaming profile on one of the servers. A gpresult of that same user account (after the updated gpo) is listed in the code block below. You can see right at the top of that output, that it is infact dealing with a roaming profile. - And sure enough, on the server that's hosting the file share for roaming profiles, it creates a folder for the user once they log in. For testing purposes, I've deleted all copies of the user's profile, roaming and local. But the problem is still here. - So I'm aparently missing something in the group policy settings on a wider scale. Would anybody be able to point me in the direction of what I'm missing here? *gpresult /r*** Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Operating System Group Policy Result tool v2.0 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. 1981-2001 Created On 5/15/2010 at 8:59:00 AM RSOP data for ** on * : Logging Mode OS Configuration: Member Workstation OS Version: 6.1.7600 Site Name: N/A Roaming Profile: \\profiles$** Local Profile: C:\Users*** Connected over a slow link?: No USER SETTINGS CN=*****,OU=*****,OU=*****,OU=*****,DC=*****,DC=***** Last time Group Policy was applied: 5/15/2010 at 8:52:02 AM Group Policy was applied from: *****.*****.com Group Policy slow link threshold: 500 kbps Domain Name: USSLINDSTROM Domain Type: Windows 2000 Applied Group Policy Objects ----------------------------- ForceLocalProfilesOnly InternetExplorer_***** GlobalPasswordPolicy The following GPOs were not applied because they were filtered out ------------------------------------------------------------------- DAgentFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSAdmin_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) NetlogonFirewallExceptions Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) NetLogon_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleManualInstall Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleDaily_0300 Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleThu_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) AlternateSSLFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) SNMPFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleSun_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) SQLServerFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleTue_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleSat_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) DisableUAC Filtering: Denied (Security) ICMPFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) AdminShareFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) GPRefreshInterval Filtering: Denied (Security) ServeRAIDFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleFri_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) BlockFirewallExceptions(8400-8410) Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleWed_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) Local Group Policy Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) WSUS_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) LogonAsService_Idaho Filtering: Denied (Security) ReportServerFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleMon_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) TFSFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) Default Domain Policy Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) DenyServerSideRoamingProfiles Filtering: Denied (Security) ShareConnectionsRemainAlive Filtering: Denied (Security) The user is a part of the following security groups --------------------------------------------------- Domain Users Everyone BUILTIN\Users BUILTIN\Administrators NT AUTHORITY\INTERACTIVE CONSOLE LOGON NT AUTHORITY\Authenticated Users This Organization LOCAL *****Users VPNAccess_***** NetAdmin_***** SiteAdmin_***** WSAdmin_***** VPNAccess_***** LocalProfileOnly_***** NetworkAdmin_***** LocalProfileOnly_***** VPNAccess_***** NetAdmin_***** Domain Admins WSAdmin_***** WSAdmin_***** ***** ***** Schema Admins ***** Enterprise Admins Denied RODC Password Replication Group High Mandatory Level

    Read the article

  • Software to report internet traffic for home user

    - by Mehper C. Palavuzlar
    I need a freeware to monitor my internet activity, especially upload and download amounts over time. For instance, I like to see a graph or table that shows the downloaded and uploaded amounts per day, week or month and in total for a selected period. OS: Windows XP, Vista, 7 Edit: I don't need to see the traffic program by program. I'm not interested in which program accesses the internet, but I'm interested in monitoring my incoming and outgoing data amounts using a light-weight freeware.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >